Acturial Assessment For Pension Updation

[Narayanan Venkateshwaran]

The Govt should have well gone in to the pros and cons of Committing for Defined pension scheme in 1995 when it got going. 

There was absolutely no scope for change of equities governing the fund as it was introduced. 

Unfortunately the govt had subjected the fund to all sorts of tribulations in the following manner.

*Divestment of ownership from 100%to 51%

*Cleaning up of Balance sheet

*Introduction of NPS from 2010.

*Stategic merger of Banks. 

Whether collateral damage to pension fund and hapless pensioners taken into account? 

No is the answer. 

Now the govt looking for escape route, have got up an acturial report indicating funds "Inadequacy" to permit updation. 

AIBAPRC representing a section of retirees have proof to show that funds are adequate to absorb updation cost

Who is right? Who is wrong? 

It will be in the fitness of things if Hon court kindly decides to appoint an Independent Acturial expert to find which side is wrong. 

There is a saying "If a thorny bush falls on  a thin cloth or a thin cloth falls on a thorny bush the damage is to cloth only"

Pensioners are thin cloth. It will be a great gesture on the part of SC to persuade the authorities to go  as per Defined pension scheme which has provision for updation

C V Narayanan

[Niranjan Cn]

Sir,

IT is better not to make any attempt to prove sufficiency of PEnsion funds - without understanding PEnsion Funds and AS(Accounting Standards) 15.  AIBPARC are not bound any regulations/rules/standards while making bezzar claims regarding pension funds.

AIBPARC is dominated and manged by IOB ARISE - as the top leadership are from IOB.  Almost three years back - I took the example of IOB PEnsion Fund and worked our the details in detail.  Please refer the attachment for illustration/workings.

Let the AIBPARC come out in clear terms - the amount of 3000+ crore requirement is for what ?? These calculations as per which Standards ?  I had shared my workings with all AIBPARC office bearers - no explanation were given by them.

The statements are made only to get immediate applause from members - and they are hiding the facts from the members.  IT is not good either for them or members.  Lies have short life.

Niranjan

Ex Canara

--
Visit our blog site http:://bankpensioner.blogspot.com
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "bankpensioner" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bankpensione...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bankpensioner/CAJev%3Da87cZN4hgVQzPDGb51f5HkXP15s6wO4u3z2ZA_sFXst7g%40mail.gmail.com.

[Narayanan Venkateshwaran]

Sir

When court  proceedings are on better that we are not feeders to respondents in Singla case

C  V narayanan

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bankpensioner/CAAX%2BdWF%3DZGZF-csgnDrO9LjdT3oG0q6%3DQr0MNcSq2bF%2B4NaU1w%40mail.gmail.com.

[JSOMA SHEKARA]

To decide if funds are sufficient or not we should arrive at the cost of updation first.

IBA cannot just claim banks cannot afford updation . It has to prove it with cost details.

Pre 2002 retirees Basic not updated even once

8th-11th BPS pensioners Basic updated at different DA levels

12th BPS pensioners Basic upto date.

iBA and UFBU have not discussed and arrived at  any Updation formula, load factor etc.

So IBA has to clarify what is updation cost and how it is calculated which formula is applied for arriving at cost etc, Without providing these details vague claims of 80000 crores etc is illogical and unfair.

Petitioners should demand these details from IBA and file counter reply.

You are aware that IBA has to provide such details to the petitioner  side so that they can go through it and file objections.

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bankpensioner/CAAX%2BdWF%3DZGZF-csgnDrO9LjdT3oG0q6%3DQr0MNcSq2bF%2B4NaU1w%40mail.gmail.com.

[Niranjan Cn]

Sir,

It is very simple - the pension funds have funds enough to pay pension as per existing regulations.  Anything more banks have to contribute.

Now banks can say /offer we provide 10000 crores (onetime),  then increase has to be worked out distributed as per proportionate formulae.   

Better we don’t touch funds part, that will not be favourable to us.

Niranjan 

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bankpensioner/CAM%3DeiW0GEFJzkK%2BwEOqw_jhMtVyUbj3RBRKQgvWWt80hEraw%3DQ%40mail.gmail.com.

[Anand Rao]

Dear all,

The BEST EMAIL till date on the Singla case is by Sri C V NARAYANAN.

When court  proceedings are on better that we are not feeders to respondents in Singla case

C  V narayanan

No discussion required till ORDERS are passed on 6th May 2026 or thereafter, hopefully ASAP. 

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bankpensioner/CAJev%3Da97iFEOWmwCQTLwN7Wfm_0Fdc8VWv5zOnkVR8UesvoN2Q%40mail.gmail.com.

[Logu Kuppan]

Whether IBA/DFS filed yearwise breakup of actuaries statement on 4th May 2026 to Supreme Court.

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bankpensioner/CAAX%2BdWH0Q8nVOuRwu6Ko%2Bf%2BPjLg9V0aYtxNS_iZj%3DqFWfSQTBw%40mail.gmail.com.

[Sridhar Mandyam]

Refering to pension fund is like asking, when there is a huge balance in SB deposits with banks, why can't bank credit some amount to my account?. We are only eligible to demand payments from the fund for which we have contributed 

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bankpensioner/CAF_reYWYuY%2BSB%3DmgVFRhL1LiRL-QSA0RU8e7W3zdJcPwMJn4CA%40mail.gmail.com.

[Niranjan Cn]

Sir, why they will file??  No Court has asked and may not ask.  If banks have to pay legally- banks have to pay…

Niranjan 

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bankpensioner/CAF_reYWYuY%2BSB%3DmgVFRhL1LiRL-QSA0RU8e7W3zdJcPwMJn4CA%40mail.gmail.com.

[Nagaraj Tirumani Vemula]

  

       MY  REPLY  TO THE ABOVE ISSUE-    

06-05-2026  BANGALORE     

 REGARDING     PENSION  AND  RELATED  ISSUES  -

SIR(S)

EVERY  ISSUE  HAS TWO  ASPECTS -

      

                       ONE - 

  WHAT YOU SAID ABOVE  IS  A MATTER  OF  INDUSTRIAL  RELATIONS  AND

INDUSTRIAL  HARMONY.   IT  IS  A MATTER  OF   BI PARTITE  ,  TRI- PARTITE

OR  MULTI PARTY   SETTLEMENT.   

THIS   IS     THE    PRIMARY ASPECT   OR INITIAL  SETTLEMENT.  

OF ANY   ISSUE.

                TWO   

  THIS  ASPECT  IS  VERY  CRUCIAL    -    CALLED   FINAL   TEST  

  ACID OR  LITMUS  TEST. CRUCIAL ASPECT  -    - LEGAL TEST

 

   -    

      

       A.     EVERY  ASPECT   CAN  BE   SPLIT  INTO  CONTRACTUAL TERMS

                AND   .MUST  SATISFY AS  FOLLOWS -  

  

     B.  MUST  BE ENFORCEABLE LAW        CONTRACT  ACT  TRUST ACT   

SALE OF GOODS ACT  INCOME TAX  ACT    OR  ANY  OTHER ENFORCEABLE   LAW  IN 

 INDIA.

C.      IT MUST BE JUSTIFIED

D.    IT MUST  BE CONVINCING.

E.    THE CONTENT MUST BE STRONG  ENOUGH TO HOLD WATER

F.       .IT MUST ENSURE  100% COMPLIANCE BY  EVERY  PARITY CONCERNEG D

G.  IT MUST  PROMOTE THE OBJECTIVE OF THE  LAW  OR ENACTMENT.

 H...   IF THERE IS  ANY CLASH  BETWEEN  OBJECTIVE OF  RELEVANT LAW

AND  THE  INTENTION  OF LAW MAKERS, THEN.  THE OBJECTIVE  OF 

RELEVANT LAW  SHOULD RULE OVER  INTENTION OF  LAW  MAKERS.

EVERY ONE  SHOULD  OBSERVE AND CRITICALLY  EXAMINE EVERYTHING

HAPPENING AROUND  US.   CRITICAL OBSERVATION BY EVERYONE OF US

OPPORTUNITIES  TO LEARN  MORE AND BECOME  WELL INFORMED.

HENCE       I HOPE  YOU  WELL INFORMED PERSONS

DO THE NEEDFUL  TO SOLVE  THE  ISSUES  -  LIKE  PENSION ISSUE (S)

I  HOPE  YOU WILL RESPOND  TO ME  B AN E MAIL TO ME.

WITH  REGARDS,          NAGARAJ  T  V    RETIRED   SBI  RETIREE

   MY  P F NO.1883070    IN  SBI     MY PAN NO.ABTPN 5713 DINCOME TAX 

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bankpensioner/CAF_reYWYuY%2BSB%3DmgVFRhL1LiRL-QSA0RU8e7W3zdJcPwMJn4CA%40mail.gmail.com.